Design Template by Bikingtoronto

« Velodrome? Maybe, maybe not. | Main | Bike parking at the Long Bridge Park »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

My issue with the boathouse is that the trailhead is barely bigger than the trail. It would very little added traffic, foot and/or vehicular, to jam it completely. My understanding of the intended uses in the last application included social gatherings as well, which one might expect in a spiffy new, expensive facility with unmatched water views.

I'm not clear why NPS would be opposed to a trail connector between MVT and Long Bridge Park. Any bike bridge that is built there would lie in between the bridges for the commercial train tracks and the MetroRail tracks. Those two bridges/tracks are barely 100 ft. apart. That's supposed to be a scenic area?

And it's not as though a bike/pedestrian bridge is going to look so terrible. It will probably have better aesthetics than the rusty train bridge.

Re Boathouse:

I've always thought that Fletcher's would be a neat place for the GU boathouse and it certainly could use some upgrading.

You have plenty of room there for parking and already have road access. Though one downside is that it is a bit of a walk from campus.

Re Virginia Driver:

Once again we see that the right to drive is the right to kill (or maim) with near impunity.

As for the Metro bridge in Foundry Branch and the connection to GU campus, isn't that issue of the GU loop road (connecting Resevoir & Canal road) still looming somewhere in GU's Master Plan...?

That would certainly impact any trail development between Foxhall and GU campus.

As someone who pedals down Macarthur, Foxhall, through the Foundry Branch tunnel every morning, I'm intrigued by this idea of a connector through to Georgetown...may have to figure out how to attend this Dec. 13th meeting.

As for the location of the boathouse the article says between 34th and 1200ft upriver of Key Bridge (map here: http://g.co/maps/kknp8 )
It looks like the only place for them to build is along the trail (past the Wash. Canoe club) and I can't see that being done without adding some type of vehicle access - it'll start to get pretty crowded right along the river there.

I wonder what Georgetown has in mind this go round. In the last iteration, the plan was to "trade" a worthless parcel of landlocked land for the prime riverfront site. The kicker was that the Zoning Board had ruled that the site had such poor access that it could only be used by members of Georgetown. So part of a National Park was going to be permanently appropriated for private use and closed to the public forever. It was one of those moments that makes you feel like everyone in the world has lost their mind, because otherwise sensible people were talking about this like it might be a reasonable thing. I was never able to discern any justification on Georgetown's part for this public taking other than they really, really wanted to do it. Somehow that was enough.

And of course, ideas like that never die, they just get delayed.

Yeah, the piece of land Georgetown wants is very valuable. That doesn't mean I don't think they should get it, I'd just like to see them pay the right price for it.

For those new to this, here is a post I wrote on it before with a drawing of what it would look like from the trail.

http://www.thewashcycle.com/2007/12/nps-to-host-sco.html

Vehicle access would be on the trail.

I missed the part about GU having the rights to use the first mile of the CCT for vehicle access.

Provided that they only convert the first few hundred feet of the CCT into a driveway for the boathouse and install some signs to keep non-Boathouse drivers from using it as a turnaround, it could keep traffic down.

If they share parking with the Wash. Canoe Club and only make the vehicle access to the Boathouse for loading/unloading, then the impact on the trail-users could be minimized.

In order to strengthen the link between the CCT and the Foundry Branch (proposed) bridge trail, the FB tunnel could be cleaned up and landscaped.

Its still unclear to me whether or not the GU Loop road (Resevoir to Canal) is dead or still being contemplated - that would have a pretty significant impact on any proposals for a trail along Foundry Branch.


As a related aside, here's what Canal Road looked like, during the construction of the Whitehurst:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ddotphotos/4830228499/sizes/o/in/set-72157624457000512/

I guess the District is fairly neutral on the bloathouse? Otherwise it would condemn the inholding, which would take GU's leverage away.

Having more boathouses on the Potomac would be a good thing. Vehicles should be seen only during regattas. Philly's Schuylkill River Trail goes right past their Boathouse Row (http://flic.kr/p/U8eMp). Adding a new connection to Georgetown would be awesome.

I think the difference in Philly is that there is also a parallel road, which allows for easier access. One can't really use Canal Rd as an access point for this proposed location.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009

Categories

 Subscribe in a reader